Harvey next year; My fears

[E Shed]

There is plenty of plausible explanations as to why we have had such and awful year but also a long list of baffling selections & positional moves which have left many of us scratching our heads.
On the draft side we haven't had a look at Mitchie yet but Fasolo, Darling are both entrenched in top 4 sides and playing good footie their first years and that's enough to make some of us uneasy that we took Vic kids over them.
It's a long off season.
As has been noted both Bell and Hasleby predicted us to have a bad year on the back of the lack of pre-seasons for vital players. Their opinions surely carry some weight.

 

[theGav56]

I think your assuming a lot by thinking that Harvey rated the list when he took over, he was the interim coach for 7 games and limited in what you can do in one off-season to get what you want in place player-wise. Did you miss his career as an assistant with us? If he wasn't across the capabilities of the list then who would have been? Furthermore, comparing the Geelong side that Scott inherited to the one Harvey inherited is laughable. Did I do that? I said he took the "plumb" job at the time.

Scott has done a great job nobody is saying anything different, Well yes they are. Your post says any of 15+ senior assistants could have done the same, and that the praise he has received makes you sick.... however he's inherited everything he could wish for and more.

What makes you sick about it again? The praise is saying he has done a great job????

 

[Belnakor]

Connolly had worse players and achieved more than Harvey has.

 

[Selggad]

Forget getting Eade - get Brian Cook.

Spot on

 

[BeinPurplenGreen]

Why was harvey at freo in the first place? Hart and Buhagiar got him because they thought Cuddly after two years(2004,2005) laced with player dis-satisfaction would fail in 2006.

well it happen a year later.

we need a senior assistant, one who has been there and done it to add some flair and imagination and to take over if harvey can't deliver in 2012.

ie Eade, Laidley, Bailey, Craig, Mark Williams, Knights,

said earlier in thread Simon LLoyd great development coach not sure about being an assistant- needs to go back to overseeing docker academy.
our young guns have stalled.

The club needs to spend money on the footy dept.

Needs a new midfield coach - Mark Riccuto

Agree with everything except the purpleised bits - Roo or Bassett or Peter German or Sanderson would all be god assets IMHO. Doubt Harvs would let them appoint Eade or Craig or Laidley, but I'd go for any of those three first - sat next to Rocket and Leon Cameron at a footy function here in Canberra a couple of years ago and they both struck me as really switched on focused coaches. Nathan Eagleton is a tossbag though...

Did you just say Knights? Knights?

He did indeed. He also said BAILEY - such tanking scum must never be allowed to cross the hearth of our club in any capacity.

He did. I checked. But the point is valid despite it. I would like someone of the calibre of Eade, but up and coming coaches who work their butts off and have the ability to coach a line are fine by me.

Agreed - the idea of getting an experienced assistant in is a great one - maybe also someone like Neeldy if he misses out on a job in Vic?

There is plenty of plausible explanations as to why we have had such and awful year but also a long list of baffling selections & positional moves which have left many of us scratching our heads.
On the draft side we haven't had a look at Mitchie yet but Fasolo, Darling are both entrenched in top 4 sides and playing good footie their first years and that's enough to make some of us uneasy that we took Vic kids over them.
It's a long off season.
As has been noted both Bell and Hasleby predicted us to have a bad year on the back of the lack of pre-seasons for vital players. Their opinions surely carry some weight.

I get the point about the draft hindsight, but to be fair I think many are willing to give Viv and J-done another year or two before making the call. It really is just the selections, on field positioning and bizarre use of players that is causing most of the angst on here I think. All of us seem to struggle to explain what is happening in these areas this year, which is very strange because they were three things that we were very, very good at last year. Why the sudden, bizzaro switches in selection, position and tactical policy after just 12 months?? Even the apologists struggle to explain why Pav is not left mostly forward, why Kep and Palms can't get a game, and why when JA finally gets a game it is for one game only.

Connolly had worse players and achieved more than Harvey has.

Pure rubbish. Cuddles had far higher picks, far more "superstar" recruits, and only had one run of any note (second half of 2006). He buggered that up with carp selection and coaching too...

 

[Tommo]

Agree with everything except the purpleised bits - Roo or Bassett or Peter German or Sanderson would all be god assets IMHO. Doubt Harvs would let them appoint Eade or Craig or Laidley, but I'd go for any of those three first - sat next to Rocket and Leon Cameron at a footy function here in Canberra a couple of years ago and they both struck me as really switched on focused coaches. Nathan Eagleton is a tossbag though...



He did indeed. He also said BAILEY - such tanking scum must never be allowed to cross the hearth of our club in any capacity.



Agreed - the idea of getting an experienced assistant in is a great one - maybe also someone like Neeldy if he misses out on a job in Vic?



I get the point about the draft hindsight, but to be fair I think many are willing to give Viv and J-done another year or two before making the call. It really is just the selections, on field positioning and bizarre use of players that is causing most of the angst on here I think. All of us seem to struggle to explain what is happening in these areas this year, which is very strange because they were three things that we were very, very good at last year. Why the sudden, bizzaro switches in selection, position and tactical policy after just 12 months?? Even the apologists struggle to explain why Pav is not left mostly forward, why Kep and Palms can't get a game, and why when JA finally gets a game it is for one game only.



Pure rubbish. Cuddles had far higher picks, far more "superstar" recruits, and only had one run of any note (second half of 2006). He buggered that up with carp selection and coaching too...

And I don't remember cuddles having to deal with the level of injuries that we have had this year.

 

[dominguez]

The media expected Freo to win that year and Geelong to fall this year which means nothing. Melbourne was talked up as a super team in waiting and Worsfold was about to be sacked. They do not know what they are talking about most of the time.

I think your assuming a lot by thinking that Harvey rated the list when he took over, he was the interim coach for 7 games and limited in what you can do in one off-season to get what you want in place player-wise. Furthermore, comparing the Geelong side that Scott inherited to the one Harvey inherited is laughable.

Scott has done a great job nobody is saying anything different, however he's inherited everything he could wish for and more.

Gav makes a fair point, at the end of 2007 we drafted Kepler Bradley, Mark Johnson and Josh Head, allowed Peter bell to live in Geraldton, and McManus and Farmer were retained (Matt Carr too?).

That's the list management of a club expecting to play finals.

 

[Clay Davis]

Gav makes a fair point, at the end of 2007 we drafted Kepler Bradley, Mark Johnson and Josh Head, allowed Peter bell to live in Geraldton, and McManus and Farmer were retained (Matt Carr too?).

That's the list management of a club expecting to play finals.

Are you saying we should have cut deeply into that draft? We're barely going to retain the players we got from it as it is. There was very little talent in that year.

 

[dominguez]

Connolly had worse players and achieved more than Harvey has.

Connolly took over a list with far more upside and had the easier job IMO.

At the start of 2002 our core group was Croad, Bell, Brown, Farmer, Pavlich, Hasleby, Longmuir, Simmonds, McPharlin and the oldest would have been around 24. 2003 should have been the first of 4 or 5 consecutive years of finals. In 2008 most of those players were still in our best 18 but were at the end of their careers and we drafted **** all between 2002-2006 to replace them.

The list management team struck gold with Barlow and Silvagni though, Harvey's win/loss % without those two would be embarrassing.

 

[dominguez]

Are you saying we should have cut deeply into that draft? We're barely going to retain the players we got from it as it is. There was very little talent in that year.

Not at all, but there's a middle ground between drafting a 30 year old plus retaining a player who's priorities were outside footy and loading up in the draft.

If the club thought the list would be rebuilding 12 months down the track but didn't rate the draft they could have picked up the best 20-22 year olds in the country like we did with Barlow/Silvgni instead of a couple of guys who were 29+.

 

[Clay Davis]

Not at all, but there's a middle ground between drafting a 30 year old plus retaining a player who's priorities were outside footy and loading up in the draft.

If the club thought the list would be rebuilding 12 months down the track but didn't rate the draft they could have picked up the best 20-22 year olds in the country like we did with Barlow/Silvgni instead of a couple of guys who were 29+.

Aside from Mark Johnson, what was wrong with the rest of the strategy? What was the difference in strategy between getting Josh Head and getting Mzungu/Lower? What's the difference between keeping Bell around (who had other commitments) and keeping Hayden around (who is constantly injured).

 

[dominguez]

Aside from Mark Johnson, what was wrong with the rest of the strategy? What was the difference in strategy between getting Josh Head and getting Mzungu/Lower? What's the difference between keeping Bell around (who had other commitments) and keeping Hayden around (who is constantly injured).

Making Bell honour his contract is hard to justify if you're arguing that the club didn't anticipate playing finals.

The difference between Lower/Mzungu and Head is
a) The number of players 21 and under on the list at the end of the 2010 season in comparison to the end of 2007.
b) The club expected to play finals this year.

 

[Clay Davis]

Making Bell honour his contract is hard to justify if you're arguing that the club didn't anticipate playing finals.

It's not hard to justify at all. He was a quality player, former captain. Still contributed in 2008 when he played.

The difference between Lower/Mzungu and Head is
a) The number of players 21 and under on the list at the end of the 2010 season in comparison to the end of 2007.

I really don't see what this has to do with anything, unless you are making an argument that we should have drafted more 18 year olds.

b) The club expected to play finals this year.

It didn't in 2009 and picked up Broughton.

 

[prattsta]

Johnson was the only pick from that draft that was hard to understand. However, if you put it alongside the McPhee and Solomon recruitment's, you can see what Harvey was getting it. Basically just a hard, experienced player to do the dirty work and provide some toughness to what has always been considered a soft team.

Josh Head was playing well in the WAFL and actually looked okay in his first season at the club. No different to bringing in Mzungu, Barlow, Broughton, Faulks, Silvagni and Co. really.

 

[DrJon]

I think people over-rate what we did last year.

Apart from the Geelong and Hawthorn game (where everything just clicked), and the Carlton games (they were our bunnies at that stage), the rest of the games we got teams at the right time.

Harvey is really lucky that
1) He was one of the first teams to implement the forward defensive zone (nearly all the teams have caught up by now)
2) Barlow landed in his lap
3) Mundy pulled his finger out to become elite

otherwise we'd by looking for another coach right now

2010 = 2003

I'm sick of this 2010 revisionism, saying it actually wasn't that good.

We won 13 games well. I can't think of any games we won where we didn't thoroughly deserve it. We likely would've been top 4 with a double chance if we hadn't suffered significant injuries to key personnel at various times throughout the year, especially late on, when we were missing Ballantyne, Barlow and Sandilands.

But because it's us we were just fortunate with playing teams at the right time. No other possible reason for it.

B*llshit.

 

[Lach72]

I'm sick of this 2010 revisionism, saying it actually wasn't that good.

We won 13 games well. I can't think of any games we won where we didn't thoroughly deserve it. We likely would've been top 4 with a double chance if we hadn't suffered significant injuries to key personnel at various times throughout the year, especially late on, when we were missing Ballantyne, Barlow and Sandilands.

But because it's us we were just fortunate with playing teams at the right time. No other possible reason for it.

B*llshit.

I'm inclined to agree

 

[theGav56]

I think people over-rate what we did last year.

Apart from the Geelong and Hawthorn game (where everything just clicked), and the Carlton games (they were our bunnies at that stage), the rest of the games we got teams at the right time.

Harvey is really lucky that
1) He was one of the first teams to implement the forward defensive zone (nearly all the teams have caught up by now)
2) Barlow landed in his lap
3) Mundy pulled his finger out to become elite

otherwise we'd by looking for another coach right now


2010 = 2003

1) and 3) are legitimate coaching accolades, not luck. They may or not actually be of Harvey's doing, but if he cops the crap he has to get the chocolates too. The reality is we were much more innovative last season and it reaped some rewards, which is what I think some posters are calling over-achieving. Sending the B's to Tassie was a good move, well thought out, and reaped rewards. That is good coaching.

 

[E Shed]

I'm sick of this 2010 revisionism, saying it actually wasn't that good.

We won 13 games well. I can't think of any games we won where we didn't thoroughly deserve it. We likely would've been top 4 with a double chance if we hadn't suffered significant injuries to key personnel at various times throughout the year, especially late on, when we were missing Ballantyne, Barlow and Sandilands.

But because it's us we were just fortunate with playing teams at the right time. No other possible reason for it.

B*llshit.

I don't completely disagree but there were quite a few games last year where the team we were playing lost vital players to injury both the week before and during the game we played them. I remember thinking we were having a charmed run early in the year. Of course every team that wins a flag needs some luck to go their way and we sure ran out of luck toward the end of the year and into this year.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

I don't completely disagree but there were quite a few games last year where the team we were playing lost vital players to injury both the week before and during the game we played them. I remember thinking we were having a charmed run early in the year. Of course every team that wins a flag needs some luck to go their way and we sure ran out of luck toward the end of the year and into this year.

You could say we had a good preseason

We were up and about early, got a few teams on the slide, and some teams in an injury or form slump. Winning builds confidence and no doubt we were playing some good confident footy. But same old story when teams come to play - we turn to water, the exceptions being the first Geelong game and the last Hawks game - a lot of things clicked those days.

I don't take pleasure in discrediting our 2010 season, but it seems like a few supporters (and opposition supporters - see main board) think that 2012 will be where 2010 left off, because we'll have our injuries sorted out. Some perspective here. We are still a team with unhealthy reliance on certain players to make our gameplan/structure work (though at least our ruck department isn't as fragile as it used to be).

Imo we have to at the very least trade for some big bodied mids otherwise we're going to miss the boat.


PS - It seems the coaching department have admitted the 'calculated' risks on our injured players. Top 8 in mind, smart coaching would've been sending our Tasmania B team to games against teams that even most of our supporters would've put down to losses (Saints, Hawks, Carlton..)

 

[Clay Davis]

Trade for big bodied mids? WTF?

 

[dominguez]

Imo we have to at the very least trade for some big bodied mids otherwise we're going to miss the boat.

Not sure about that. With Pav returning to the forward line McPhee will probably be our number one run with player next year so it might be Sandilands, Barlow, Mundy and Mcphee in the centre square round one, all of whom are 190cm+ and 89kg+ and collectively will be the biggest combination in the comp.

Morabito, deBoer and Lower will also rotate through there as our B team, the smallest being Lower at 187/87. Even Fyfe with another summer in the gym will be in the mid-80 kg's.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

Maybe you're right Dom, but in terms of midfielder depth, we still have a lot of deadwood to cut. 2012 could easily be another year that we start well and run out of steam at the end. Having more players that can last the season and play hard contested football can only be beneficial. We have enough outside recievers.

 

[Nothing]

The current CEO is too preoccupied with bling (jumpers, song etc) Cook couldn't give a shit about bling, he has bigger fish to fry.

Looks like the current CEO is concerned with getting the best coach possible!

Three cheers for the Steves.

 

[Tommo]

Looks like the current CEO is concerned with getting the best coach possible!

Three cheers for the Steves.

Here here

 

[Purple Jesus]

Eerily accurate calls.